USPTO serial 77022522
FRESH DOESN'T COME IN A JAR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHOSID, ROBIN S
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with FRESH DOESN'T COME IN A JAR?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Deborah L. Benson
Deborah L. Benson, Amy B. Spagnole, Brian Matross, Loginov & Associates, PLLC10 Water StreetConcord, NH 03301UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Hommus, tahini, and other Middle Eastern food products, namely, kibbie consisting of ground lamb meat mixed with cracked wheat, nuts and seasoned spices; stuffed grape leaves, fruit and vegetable salads, vegetable-based spreads, falafel, taboule, and baba ghannouj | ACTIVE | — |
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
- Other trademarks owned by Hannah International Foods, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Hannah International Foods, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 029
- Similar marks named FRESH DOESN'T COME IN A JAR
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 22, 2008 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Dec 22, 2008 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Mar 20, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 8, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 8, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Feb 8, 2008 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Nov 20, 2007 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Aug 28, 2007 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Aug 8, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 20, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 20, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 3, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 3, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 2, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 2, 2007 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Apr 25, 2007 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Apr 25, 2007 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 5, 2007 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Mar 2, 2007 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Mar 2, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 24, 2006 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |